Navigation

The Rational Response Squad is a group of atheist activists who impact society by changing the way we view god belief. This site is a haven for those who are pushing back against the norm, and a place for believers of gods to have their beliefs exposed as false should they want to try their hand at confronting us.

Buy any item on AMAZON, and we'll use the small commission to help end theism, dogma, violence, hatred, and other irrationality. Buy an Xbox 360 -- PS3 -- Laptop -- Apple

I believe in god.

Posted on: May 15, 2007 - 5:17am

Anbesol

Posts: 116

Joined: 2007-05-15

Offline

I believe in god.

Haha, can you save me guys? No, but seriously though - I appreciate your motives - evangelistic Christianity is certainly a terror to our world and especially our nation. However - the same condemnatory dogma and faith in high truths they express, you express as well. You must know, science is not a reality - its a pursuit to understand reality - it is not objective, truth, it is hypothetical theory. Please stop referencing it as a corner stone for all things to be measured - there are some very fundamentally limiting abilities of empirical observation, namely being the sentient control of the observation, the sentient design and conclusion and comprehension of the observations.

Furthermore - youre so adament to disprove god, but what you blindly failed to realize is that the very word God; has carried some very intensely varying meanings across the world. Why, the grandfather to modern science and empirical observation had no shred of doubt of the existence of god. Including all of your high priests. See, the thing is - you see redneck, hillbillies making god out to be some sort of absurd willed judgmental condemning white man in the sky then, well, of course thats absurd. But, why are you so myoptic that you fail to see that the rest of the theological schools of the world actually have a more reasonable foundation to their concepts of god. So, as you destroy the word, you destroy your own integrity, for not understanding the whole of the people, and beliefs you condemn.

I actually was initially motivated to your cause, until I found out that you too have the same dogma and blind conviction and certitude that you condemn the Christians for. Science is great, but its still just theory - there is no such thing as scientific fact, its scientific hypothesis, and your religions founder (mr Newton) knew this - he spent most of his life determined to find objective knowledge, until he was guided to the calm realization that objective knowledge is unattainable through any conscious being. Until we can transcend the dimensions of the space time continuum, and develop instruments that can measure infinity (oh yeah, not going to happen), then science can not reach near the lengths to find truth.

Now, before responding to me as a radical, irrational idiot - please know the very tension of the word "truth". What is truth, must exist absolutely, what is absolute, is incapable of being objectively observed within the confines of the space-time continuum. So, this is not to say I do not embrace the theories of science, this is to say I am not limited to them, which is simply called open-minded. Why, indeed I actually quite enjoy science.

However, science does point to something a bit profound for you to even perceive the reality of the word "god". All matter goes through constant decomposition, for every of the tiniest of nanoseconds all matter is going through a decompository conditioning. So, combined this with your first law of thermodynamics, being that all matter and energy cannot simply cease to be, they can only transform - how is it that all this matter and energy can exist constantly, whilst in constant decompository states? I would like to contend that it is through consciousness, as consciousness is the life that can make all matter remain whilst in decompository states, indeed it transforms through this consciousness. The grandest scientific hypothesis stands as a pea does next to a freight train in the concept of consciousness. The infinite of consciousness and the continuum of consciousness is what most of the eastern worlds refer to as god, which is hardly irrational or unscientific, in fact, your first law of thermodynamics was discovered by Buddha in 450 BCE, 2200 years before your science could express that.

If you look deeper then the words, youll find the truth to the words, and see past and into the experience of those words. You do realize that you are all being manipulated tools at the whim of folk like Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins. Also Jesus Christ was a wonderful man who tought great things, even if his followers of today are idiots, he was most certainly not. Your cause would be greatly benefitted if you actually learned about and understood his teachings (this requires an open mind). HIS teachings dont infringe on your own beliefs, so long as you stick with the synoptic and gnostic gospels, read his message and enjoy it - and you will see it is in sharp contradiction to modern christianity, all the way from how its run and pyramided to the actual belief in hell (jesus never believed in hell). Seeing this sharp contradiction between the fanatic Christians and the message of Christ is your greatest empowerment against the evangelical movement.

I would really love to talk with you on what you wrote... but its all bunched together in a giganto paragraph. Could you possible edit it with spaces? ;D lol

Of the parts that I read you made one false statement. Atheists are not here to disprove god. Theists have the burden to prove that god is true.

Just like I would have the burden to prove that the invisible pink unicorn in the sky is real and make invisible gum drops that send you straight to heaven.

Biochemist & Law Student

"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as His father, in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter." -Thomas Jefferson

Yeah, dude. I'd love to read what you wrote, but that'll give me eye strain. Can you perhaps insert five or six pragraph breaks?

"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.

Way to miss the entire point, you go off on irrelavent tangents with me just like you do with the Christians, this is why your movement is not succeeding with anything productive. You may be gaining numbers, but so are they - and for all your dogma, they have their own counter-dogma as well. If you want to battle evangelism, youre quite seriously doing it all wrong. If you want to battle them, you must understand them, and know how they think, work, and function. So long as you keep surmising arguments about wether jesus was real or not - youre just scraping the superficial arguments that inevitably lead nowhere - get to the root of the problems, their identity, fear, and the book of revelations.

Also, perhaps you can enlighten me as to how my concept of god is so absurd, like a pink unicorn. Please, do tell. I proved god, and if you cant have a conjecture then, well, you admit that it has been proven to you.

I put in paragraph breaks, and I actually just did prove god... And its not as absurd as a pink flying unicorn... only in redneck america has the word god taken such a disgusting meaning.

Actually, no. Let me name a few others: Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Yemen. Yes, these are Islam states, but if our redneck Christians had their way they would return us to the time of the Inquisition when YHWH was just as nasty as Allah.

If you want to get right down to it, YHWH is as nasty as Allah right now. It's in the bible. Read it. Fundamentalists are the ones who really get this. They've read the book. They know that their god is really this much of a dick. It's the moderates who have it all wrong. That's why there will always be a danger as long as people insist upon living life according to a very old, very immoral book.

Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.

(if our redneck Christians had their way they would return us to the time of the Inquisition)

The Inquisition department of the church is still in existance

Iruka Naminior wrote:

It's in the bible. Read it. Fundamentalists are the ones who really get this. They've read the book. They know that their god is really this much of a dick.

That is what happens when you trust enlightenment. (BGH) will understand. The Bible came out of the church, the church can not come from the Bible. Beliefs based soley on the interpretation of the Bible are wrong! The Bible says so.

Iruka Naminior wrote:

That's why there will always be a danger as long as people insist upon living life according to a very old, very immoral book.

I agree with this simply because there are so many people twisting the message to justify their wrongs

You proved the existance of God? Of the wizard that created the entire universe?

Wait, was this it?

Anbesol wrote:

how is it that all this matter and energy can exist constantly, whilst in constant decompository states? I would like to contend that it is through consciousness, as consciousness is the life that can make all matter remain whilst in decompository states, indeed it transforms through this consciousness. The grandest scientific hypothesis stands as a pea does next to a freight train in the concept of consciousness. The infinite of consciousness and the continuum of consciousness is what most of the eastern worlds refer to as god, which is hardly irrational or unscientific, in fact, your first law of thermodynamics was discovered by Buddha in 450 BCE, 2200 years before your science could express that.

You have proven nothing here but that you believe conciousness is the goo that holds reality together. That is hardly "proof" of anything.

bordering on trolling? How absurd, I gave you a descriptive scientific explenation to provide substantiating evidence of the existence of god, and you now copout by calling me a troll? Wow, it takes all kinds I suppose, why dont you practice reading without filtering what youre reading with your monstrous ego.

Furthermore - my conjecture intended to prove no such thing as a specifically abrahamic god, in fact, im not even a big fan of abrahamic history, except for Christ - its all pretty much mindless dribble. I came here to prove god, not a specificall willed god, not the god of the fanatical christian church, to prove god.

Christ was the Gandhi of his time, he taught peace and tolerance, he condemned nobody and he embraced all walks of life. Obviously, his followers arent doing a very good job of that right now.

I do not associate my conjecture with the literal writings of any specific scripture - it is to stand on its own as a very real scientific hypothesis, and is to be assessed as such - so please, quit putting idea's in my writings that were never there to begin with.

Also - much of you guys are obviously completly ignorant of eastern philosophy and practice, in fact, the only real oppression going on in the eastern world right now comes from the hands of atheists, oppressing some of the most convicted religious practicioners - being the Tibetan Buddhists, suppressed by the Atheistic, communistic Peoples Republic of China. They do some terrible things over there, and if I were one dimensional like much of you - I too could walk away from that and find it easy to blame the scape-goat of atheism, I could say "oh my, oh my! atheists are doing bad things, therefor, all atheists are bad!" hows that "rational"??? open your eyes, if you want to battle evangelism, quit feuling their fire - right now youre only giving them canon fotter and escalating the cultural conditioning that perpetuates these feuds anyway.

You proved the existance of God? Of the wizard that created the entire universe?

Wait, was this it?

Anbesol wrote:

how is it that all this matter and energy can exist constantly, whilst in constant decompository states? I would like to contend that it is through consciousness, as consciousness is the life that can make all matter remain whilst in decompository states, indeed it transforms through this consciousness. The grandest scientific hypothesis stands as a pea does next to a freight train in the concept of consciousness. The infinite of consciousness and the continuum of consciousness is what most of the eastern worlds refer to as god, which is hardly irrational or unscientific, in fact, your first law of thermodynamics was discovered by Buddha in 450 BCE, 2200 years before your science could express that.

You have proven nothing here but that you believe conciousness is the goo that holds reality together. That is hardly "proof" of anything.

Or was your proof hidden somewhere else? Point it out if you would.

okay tool, first of all - I never said god is the "wizard that created the entire universe". Thats a fanatical radical christian idea and I do not associate with it. If you refuse to see the reality of my conjecture then I cant force you to hear what your wormy little mind refuses to hear, you ever hear the expression "only hearing what you want to hear, and only knowing what you heard". Perhaps if you stopped filtering things through the guise of your own hate-filled and cry-for-help ego then you might see more clearly what I was actually saying, you took an immediate stance against my conjecture and you projected the idea that I am an absurd radicalist and just as you read my post you have painte my words with those ideas. NOT because they exist in reality or because I actually intended them, but because thats what you wanted to hear.

Also - much of you guys are obviously completly ignorant of eastern philosophy and practice, in fact, the only real oppression going on in the eastern world right now comes from the hands of atheists, oppressing some of the most convicted religious practicioners - being the Tibetan Buddhists, suppressed by the Atheistic, communistic Peoples Republic of China. They do some terrible things over there, and if I were one dimensional like much of you - I too could walk away from that and find it easy to blame the scape-goat of atheism, I could say "oh my, oh my! atheists are doing bad things, therefor, all atheists are bad!" hows that "rational"??? open your eyes, if you want to battle evangelism, quit feuling their fire - right now youre only giving them canon fotter and escalating the cultural conditioning that perpetuates these feuds anyway.

This is a common assertion from religious persons.

People of all belief systems commit horrible atrocities. This is not a cosmic secret and I am pretty sure we can all get behind this idea. The issue that religious folks leave out of this mix is that there is no unifying dogma which lends atheists to do violence on those that have different belief systems. Granted, some of us do, but that is from a personal disregard of what some call a social contract.

Being atheist is hardly a defining characteristic. Almost every atheist I have ever met differs with my beliefs fundamentally in some way or another. We merely lack the belief in god. Anything else (activism, intolerance, violence) is a matter of personal preferrence.

"It's the same with everyone" I suspect I will here.

True, but it's easier for people that have scriptures to back up their hatred and intolerance. You don't get behind any scriptures? That's your business, but why do you fight on the side of religious persons if you don't believe in what they fight for? This, to me, is odd.

That was uncalled for. Perhaps you need to step away from the computer and take a walk or something. Some deep breaths might be in order.

I challenged your assertion that you had proven God. I made the smart ass "the wizard that created the universe" to make sure that we were talking about GOD and not some quazi new age belief in energy or matter being "god".

So, where is your proof of god? Was it in the passage I quoted? If not, where was your proof, I don't see it. You didn't even respond to the quesiton.

You atheists are just as dogmatic and convicted as the radical christians you so despise. The only difference is you justify your self, instead of seeking to be understood.

Religion is not the destruction of culture and social systems, the idiots who believe they hold special dominion over truth (you guys too) are the bumfucks that create war and havoc.

I fight for religion because I practice all religions of life, including science which is - believe it or not - a school of theology. Mostly though, the evangelist movement is so radically powerful and controlling in this country that I want to help you guys battle them. I cant really help you guys battle them if you keep battling your selves and feuling their fire. You guys need to stick tot he important issues and this whole "prove god exists" is the most superficial assesment of any religion on the planet.

I practice buddhism, hinduism, sikhism, jainism, taoism, gnosticism (open minded christianity), and science. So long as you guys condemn all religions for being the same mindless drivle as redneck christianity and fanatic islam, then you guys arent doing anybody any favors, and youre treating others with the same dogma that you condemn them for. Religion is wonderful, its dogma that is dangerous. Just as you guys are convicting your self to your own high truths of science, youre just as narrow scoped as they.

If you wish to destroy evangelism, there are more important questions to ask them - rather then "does god exist". Please know that question is beyond the depths of superficial absurdity as teh grounds for any rational argument.

But, religion doesnt make god a wizard in the clouds, universe creator, only fanatic religion does that, that was my point. There is a science to god, and thats what religion tries to explore, but just as soon as they demand that they hold dominion over god, they lose all sight of god. I will not even bother attempting to prove there is a wizard universe creator because thats absurd, and you and I both know that. What I will, and have proven, is that the concept of 'god' in religion is not absurd, just because particular sects are idiots, doesnt quantify the entire world as idiots. If you guys want to practice open minded critical thinking - read up on confucian and vedic rooted civilizations and their concepts of god.

Please know, so long as you keep asking the question "does god exist", you'll only create more division, and continue to add fuel to the fire. But, ask the right questions, and the consciousness of the receivers to that question cannot deny it themselves.

The most important thing to express against religious fanatacism is the insane nature of believing god plays favorites. That gods will can be defined by egocentricity and ethnocentricity. Furthermore - its pretty obvious when you compare and contrast the synoptic gospels to the book of revelation that they are in sharp contradiction to each other. The book of revelations is the worst thing to happen to abrahamic practice - and THAT is the very thing that we must focus on if we are to combat the evangelical movement.

and so long as you maintain the belief that science is the dominion of truth and reality, you are just as blind and convicted in your irrational certitude as they.

Science is theology, plain and simple. Theology is a school of understanding reality, that is sciences aims. To pretend that science has some all-mighty power over other religions such as those rooted in confucian and vedic knowledge is beyond narrow-mindedness and unawareness, it is dangerous - as dangerous as the christians who think their perfect word of god is the dominion of truth and reality.

By the way - the laws of thermodynamics and the physics theory of flux was assessed and examined and explained by the Buddha, 2200 years before Isaac Newton came to examine them.

dont you see though - youre just like them when you demand science holds dominion over truth - truth cannot be held dominion over, quit trying to monopolize it, it is not in your capacity to comprehend or know truth - only perceive it. You have such an ardent conviction in your certitude towards science, unaware of the limitations of empirical observation.

You guys need help from a guy that actually understands the bible from the perspective of a Christian - particularly a gnostic one whos familiar with the gnostic gospels. So long as you keep attacking the belief in god, your labor will be not only fruitless, it will be destructive

I fight for religion because I practice all religions of life, including science which is - believe it or not - a school of theology.

I am not sure how you plan to back that up but I'd be curious to hear your evidence.

Quote:

You guys need to stick tot he important issues and this whole "prove god exists" is the most superficial assesment of any religion on the planet.

But...there is no evidence that there is such a thing as god.

Quote:

Just as you guys are convicting your self to your own high truths of science, youre just as narrow scoped as they.

Narrow scoped? Saying that there is no reasonable evidence that god exists is pretty firm ground and is pretty much the beginning and ending of my interest in the conversation. Dabbling into which parts of which religion is good is moot. Once you start believing in imaginary sky pixies (or even reincarnation) the idea of "rational" discussion flies out the window.

*sigh*. You still havent heard a single word I said, there is a plethora of evidence that god exists. The god of the christian bible? Hell no, thats an insipid idea. The god of the rest of the rational thinking religious world? Absolutely, and I gave you a solid conjecture and you didnt even see it.

I do not believe in imaginary sky pixies - that was incredibly rude and narrow minded of you. You obviously have no clue what confucian and vedic religions practice of god.

Also - reincarnation is a very misunderstood idea amongst the western culture. Youre expressing an obvious lack of knowledge as to its substantiations.

Of course you want to leave the argument - I made substantiating claims that you refuse to address. This is the exact dogmatic narrow mindedness that you condemn christians for. How can somebody have a discussion with you, if you are unwilling to have a discussion with them. You seem to think that discussion is "listen to me, hear me speak, dont say a word", you cant hear me for what I say to you - you hear what you want to hear.

Understanding other religions requires deep insight, and if you dont even have the discipline to listen to a simple and straightforward conjecture - I really doubt you'll ever be brought around to understanding the reality of eastern religion.

and so long as you maintain the belief that science is the dominion of truth and reality, you are just as blind and convicted in your irrational certitude as they.

Nonsense. Science is more than anything a method for minimizing error. The cool thing about it that it will work in any universe that has patterns. If there is hope of finding the truth of reality in any world, it will be through science.

Notice I did NOT say science is 'the dominion of truth.' What I said was to the extent that truth can be had, it will require science to get it.

The god of the rest of the rational thinking religious world? Absolutely, and I gave you a solid conjecture and you didnt even see it.

You are acting like you expected to come in here, redefine god, prove his existance, and lead us into victory with no discussion. Is that really what you were expecting?

You made claims in the beginning that were several scientific claims all circling around the assumption that we accept consciousness as the connecting factor. You need to be able to back up this idea or you have made no point at all ... as I said before you started calling names. And you STILL have given no logical explanation of your initial assertion that consciousness is what binds matter together.

And, how this assertion even related to "god". You seem to be giving the term an entirely different meaning. Perhaps we should be more clear on exactly what your point is. You are frustrated because you think we are all stupid and you are so clever .. but entertain the thought for a moment that perhaps you have not sufficiently presentted your point.

Oh, and try to do it without calling names and constantly calling our "egos" into question. Might get you a little farther in the discussion. I guess you didn't learn that in your studies.

Quote:

You obviously have no clue what confucian and vedic religions practice of god.

It is certainly true that my knowledge of world religions is limited. However, understanding the dribble of religion is hardly something that I am interested in. You see ... I don't believe in god.

Quote:

Also - reincarnation is a very misunderstood idea amongst the western culture. Youre expressing an obvious lack of knowledge as to its substantiations.

What is your point? That I don't understand what "exactly" reincarnation is? How does this help you in our constructive conversation?

Quote:

Understanding other religions requires deep insight, and if you dont even have the discipline to listen to a simple and straightforward conjecture - I really doubt you'll ever be brought around to understanding the reality of eastern religion.

Wait, is that what we're doing? You're trying to tutor me on Eastern religion? I was unaware that this was why we're here. I could have saved you the hassle of this conversation by explaining to you that I'm an Atheist. That means that I don't believe in god. But to clarify it further for you, I'm a Rationalist, which means that I don't believe in other hocus pocus nonsense either.

Again, I say the laws of thermodynamics and flux were discovered by Buddha some 2200 years before isaac, and by jesus (gnostic jesus) some 1600 years before Isaac. Science is another school of theology.

Religion is science, science is religion - science is a deep practice of pursuing truth, but to convict yourself in the idea that it holds dominion over the schools of buddhism, hinduism, taoism and zen and the sorts is to be unenlightened as to the teachings of those schools. I do not think that any religion holds dominion over the other - the only false religion is the one that demands itself in certitude and dogma. I cannot say that science is better then zen nor is zen better then science. They are simply two different schools. To get caught up in saying "this one is better" is to get tangled in the nasty webs of dogma.

Calling other religions "dribble" and hocus pocus nonsense is not only the hob-goblin of little minds, its actually disturbingly dogmatic and intolerant, just as the christians demand they have the "perfect word of god", you demand you have the perfect word of god, only you have changed the word "god" with truth, you think that restructuring the semantics of your thoughts actually changes the experience of them? You have already shared your conviction to your ideas - a person convicted in ideas is a closed book, so I could tell you all the substantiations in the world - you wont hear me until you want to hear me. Its not called being supremely rational, just because you are wildly rationalizing your beliefs, doesnt mean you are practicing a sense of rationing reason.

If you do not see the reality in this conjecture - it is because you are self-deceptively refusing to allow yourself to see it.

Again, I say the laws of thermodynamics and flux were discovered by Buddha some 2200 years before isaac, and by jesus (gnostic jesus) some 1600 years before Isaac. Science is another school of theology.

I think I get it. Because a person reknowned for being religious first discovered a scientific idea ... science is a religion?

You see, again you assume that we are just too idiotic to understand you. I saw that you stated Buddha (who I've done some study on in the past and I think he was a pretty cool guy btw) had discovered a scientific ideal before we were labeling things like this science. That's great, but how does that illustrate that science is a religion.

I'm sure the scientist of history / and present have been of many philisophical persuasions. I am just not sure that a theory discovered by a religious leader makes the entire field a religion.

dont you see though - youre just like them when you demand science holds dominion over truth - truth cannot be held dominion over, quit trying to monopolize it, it is not in your capacity to comprehend or know truth - only perceive it. You have such an ardent conviction in your certitude towards science, unaware of the limitations of empirical observation.

Didn't you arrive at your conclusions based on empirical observation? If so, then are you not confirming that empirical observation is reliable (at least in your opinion)? If your conclusions didn't come from observation then where did they come from, feelings, divine revelation, dreams, queen mab? Those things aren't reliable at all and certainly not more reliable than observation?

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft

Calling other religions "dribble" and hocus pocus nonsense is not only the hob-goblin of little minds, its actually disturbingly dogmatic and intolerant

Uh huh, and the fact that there is no evidense of any kind to support the idea of this nonsense doesn't make it nonsense? You just think I should be nicer about my description?

Ok, religion and religious dogma is, to date, supported by no evidence of any kind and I do not entertain such wild and unsubstantiated claims. Better?

Quote:

a person convicted in ideas is a closed book, so I could tell you all the substantiations in the world - you wont hear me until you want to hear me.

I'm trying to listen to you but you're dancing around your point. What exactly is your point? That we should unite (once we all agree that god exists as you describe it of course) and attack the unreasonable portions of religion while supporting the reasonable ones? You see where there might be a problem in this process?

Quote:

If you do not see the reality in this conjecture - it is because you are self-deceptively refusing to allow yourself to see it.

So, you refuse to back up your claim with a defensable argument? I either accept your "word" as reality and follow you blindly or I'm just a small minded bigot?

Religion is the pursuit of truth, science is the pursuit of truth. By distinguishing science as a seperate and allmighty school is to pretentiously claim that it holds dominion over all other schools. Did you ever know that nothing in the eastern religions actually combats science, in fact, not only has it made many revelations of reality before science did, science points to the reality that they perceive as well.

Bottom line - reality can only be perceived, perception is a subjective comprehension - comprehension is limited by the continuum of space and time and consciousness, so long as you remain a subject to the laws of space time and consciousness, you cannot hold high truth, you can only aspire to continue to perceive truth.

Socrates was a great man who pursued truth - a student once went to him and said "teach me the ways of truth", he then proceded to take that student out to a river, upon which point he dunked his head in the water and held the student down against his own will, he said "as soon as you start fighting to understand truth as you are fighting now for your life - come back to me". If you just want to know what truth is - you will be lost, but as soon as you can transcend your own human being in efforts to pursue truth - that is when you can then see into the deeper levels of truth.

A philosopher went to a zen master and asked "With what state of mind should one discipline ones self in the truth", to which the master responded "there is no mind to be framed, nor truth in which to be disciplined". Though these both seem like absurd notions of "hocus pocus nonsense", see into the deeper reality of the actions and the words, and you'll find truth. Eventually, you will learn to see the truth of all things. For example - the christian church wishes to give each person their own unique identity as the human being they are rather then the conscious being they are, all in the vain efforts of this is to give the community an ego, or an identity in which to fear death - thus creating the illusion that drives them TO the christian faith out of the implanted fear that they produced.

furthermore - there is a lot of good that is produced by the christian church - though it is coupled with domineering, manipulative and disgusting ideologies, there is a lot of goodness and truth in their practices as well. Just like when I read your posts, I dont see completely false lies, I see a lot of truth in your ideas as well.

You can come to the realization of this in your own time - in fact, it cant even be avoided, it is death - but let death come to your identity before it comes to your physical body, and you will see beyond your own ambitions and motives, and you will be able to assess things without any leaning of mind.

*edit - I just read your second post. I am disappointed that you see religion so poorly, it is not because religion is actually hocus pocus nonsense in REALITY, it is becase you paint it that with your own ideas and conclusions. You have not researched the depths of eastern religion - you have already come to the conclusion that it must be insipid and insane just because your all-mighty science is the dominion of truth.

and other guy - yes it was empirical observation. There is nothing wrong with empirical observation, it is a very good tool, in fact its also practiced in other religions as well. however, I do not demand that empirical observation is THE answer or THE allmighty truth, rather, it is a way to pursue truth. Although -once you get right down to it, all pursuit of truth in religion is observed empirically.

yes it was empirical observation. There is nothing wrong with empirical observation, it is a very good tool, in fact its also practiced in other religions as well. however, I do not demand that empirical observation is THE answer or THE allmighty truth, rather, it is a way to pursue truth. Although -once you get right down to it, all pursuit of truth in religion is observed empirically.

Ok, so if you used empirical observation to come to the conclusion that empiricism is unreliable, then your conclusion would have to be unreliable. In order for your conclusion to be reliable empirical observation must be reliable and that contradicts your conclusion.

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft

Calling other religions "dribble" and hocus pocus nonsense is not only the hob-goblin of little minds, its actually disturbingly dogmatic and intolerant

Anbesol wrote:

*sigh*. You still havent heard a single word I said, there is a plethora of evidence that god exists. The god of the christian bible? Hell no, thats an insipid idea.

Sunday! Sunday! Sunday! Anbesol and Anbesol go head-to-head! Which Anbesol will win? The one who thinks Christianity is insipid?...or the one who thinks calling other religions "names" is disturbingly dogmatic and intolerant! Get your tickets now and find out. Sunday! Sunday! Sunday!

Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.

Calling other religions "dribble" and hocus pocus nonsense is not only the hob-goblin of little minds, its actually disturbingly dogmatic and intolerant

Anbesol wrote:

*sigh*. You still havent heard a single word I said, there is a plethora of evidence that god exists. The god of the christian bible? Hell no, thats an insipid idea.

Sunday! Sunday! Sunday! Anbesol and Anbesol go head-to-head! Which Anbesol will win? The one who thinks Christianity is insipid?...or the one who thinks calling other religions "names" is disturbingly dogmatic and intolerant! Get your tickets now and find out. Sunday! Sunday! Sunday!

lol, another Iruka Naminori hit. Keep em comin!

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft

But, thus far you have merely expressed that you practice eastern philosopy.

Good stuff.

But seriously, WHAT IS YOUR POINT?

You initially "proved" the existance of god by redefining it as consciousness. You got aggitated and started name calling when your argument was brought into question.

Now you've outlined some of the fundamental ideals of eastern philosopy.

Great, all good, now what? Seriously dude, what is your point? What is it you want to assert? That we percieve the world through our own minds? Ok (that's pretty obvious and I don't think you've really broken any new ground there). That you believe this same consciousness has some affect on the matter of the world? Rrrrr that's pretty interesting. That you consider the terms religion and science to have the same meaning? Ok (I disagree but I hardly think that is a topic worth putting a great deal of effort into).

Calling other religions "dribble" and hocus pocus nonsense is not only the hob-goblin of little minds, its actually disturbingly dogmatic and intolerant

Anbesol wrote:

*sigh*. You still havent heard a single word I said, there is a plethora of evidence that god exists. The god of the christian bible? Hell no, thats an insipid idea.

Sunday! Sunday! Sunday! Anbesol and Anbesol go head-to-head! Which Anbesol will win? The one who thinks Christianity is insipid?...or the one who thinks calling other religions "names" is disturbingly dogmatic and intolerant! Get your tickets now and find out. Sunday! Sunday! Sunday!

also - there is plenty of evidence. The evidence just must be seen without an alterior motive. Like Jesus says, with the eyes of a child, or the Buddha teaches, the wisdom of nothingness. If you look at something trying to prove your particular motive - you will make it prove your motive. But if you assess something without any preference, bias, prejudices or preconceptions - with the eyes of a child, the wisdom of nothingness - you will see things as they really are, without the interference of your own mind.

You believe science is knowledge. But anybody that believes in knowledge is not open minded, rational, critical thinkers because they have made a conviction to their ideas. There is no such thing as knowledge - as all states of knowing are perceived, conditioned, and subject to human comprehension. Knowledge is not power, knowledge is bondage, wisdom is freedom. This is the true meanings of the genesis parables - the fruit of knowledge. The reality of it is not literal, but the fact that just as soon as people believe they have knowledge, they are expelled from the garden of eden (which runs parallel to kindgom of god), but when they become as the buddha says, empty, with the eyes of a child, dismissing knowledge as relative truths, you are invited back into the kingdom of god, the garden of eden, nirvana.

I assure you, you have not heard a thing I have said because you have not practiced the wisdom of nothingness, the eyes of a child. Your mind was very present in reading my conjecture - but it was not doing you any favors, because it was taking from my post what you wanted to hear. You have painted me to be a radical fanatic, but one law that you have yet to become familiar with is all forms of outward judgment are perfectly reciprocated. The ways you have judged me, I can see that you also judge yourself. You dismiss your own authority on your own life by submitting to dogma - by believing that you have a better truth - when you can openly perceive all forms of truth, in all religions, in all social systems, in all civilization, THEN you will have earned the wisdom of emptiness, the eyes of a child, an open mind. But right now you are just cast in darkness, and you spread your darkness by coloring others with your ideas.

Your scientific hypothesis' cannot stand against the weight of all religious thesis, it can only augment it, and express the experience diferently. Become a bit more multi-cultural and embrace all walks of life, and then you can actually work on helping them get rid of their own dogma. It is just like Jesus Says, you must first remove the timber from your own eye, before you can see well enough to remove the sliver in others.

Now, without coming to any conclusions about what, who, or how I am, only discuss with me the exact contents of my conjecture - without associating me with anybody else, throw your conjecture to me based on the PURE CONTENTS i have expressed - I have not called god sparkly pixie dust in the sky and as you judged me to have, you have acted out of preconceptions and conclusions.

Psychotherapy is my life - I can see a lot about what kind of a person someone is just by the ideas they have and the way they express them. I see in you a great intellectual capacity and a great compassion for the Christians who are so destroying our culture - but you are being your own enemy when you take up radical arms and make your preposterous broad brushed generalizations about the rest of the world without any direct or indirect experience whatsoever. You have divided people into two categories, those who believe in god and those who dont believe - and just as you painted them, your ideas will color all those around you.

my point is to stop condemning all religious people as being wrong and you right. Its the exact same thing as christians painting all of themselves as deserving of heaven and you guys all deserve hell. You are condemning others and raising your self up. When you get right down to it, the only difference between everybody is their psychological, pathological, social and biological conditionings. If this is the only field of seperation - why dont you treat other christians with the same compassion you treat non-christians? Just because you differ ideologically from them makes them less then you or less worthy of your compassion? If you want to change the world, change is best brought around in the arms of compassion. Though when I came here with a conjecture against you - it is only in efforts to help you with your own cause, and help you achieve and pursue what is really important to you - gaining equality amongst a condemning christian society. But, as Gandhi says, you must first BE the change that you want, before you can expect others to be the change that you want them to be. If somebody treats you disrespectfully, counter that with respect, and make them the asshole. If somebody condemns you, to counter that with more condemnation, counter that with an empathic understanding to their own inner strugglings, for as they act outwardly condemning, they are also acting inwardly condemning.

also - explore teh wonderful world of contradictions - you will find sharp contradictions where before you saw none, and you will see no contradictions where before you saw some.

Through natural means based on observations, empirical evidence, and observations.

Quote:

Anbesol wrote:

By distinguishing science as a seperate and allmighty school is to pretentiously claim that it holds dominion over all other schools.

Science should be seperate because it is completely different from religion. Science is based on facts and evidence, where-as religion is based on faith. To teach something in school that is virtually based off faith over evidence is absurd.

Quote:

Anbesol wrote:

Did you ever know that nothing in the eastern religions actually combats science, in fact, not only has it made many revelations of reality before science did, science points to the reality that they perceive as well.

This is where your arguement becomes void. For the simple fact that, there were many religious scientists in the world then, and there still are today. Just because you are religious does not negate the fact that science is science. You can be religious, and be a scientist at the same time, they do not correlate.

Quote:

Anbesol wrote:

Bottom line - reality can only be perceived, perception is a subjective comprehension - comprehension is limited by the continuum of space and time and consciousness, so long as you remain a subject to the laws of space time and consciousness, you cannot hold high truth, you can only aspire to continue to perceive truth.

Not true. Reality is defined by laws. We know what is possible, and what is not possible. We are limited by certain aspects in this existence and those limitations are what create our reality. Our ability to reason is natural. The universe is natural. We are more than capable of coming to an understanding of our universe, our existence through natural means.

I will not debate with you on the depths of religion because I admit that I do not know as much as you do about religion. I have not had nearly as sufficient enough years to study it as you have seeing as I am only 16 and still in high school yet I am doing my best to learn as much as I can about everything.

Quote:

Anbesol wrote:

there is a lot of good that is produced by the christian church

Write a list of all the good religion[chrsitianity specifically] has done in this world. And write a list of all the bad. Lets see which one is bigger?

In other words however. Welcome to the forums. And I hope you enjoy your stay.

"Why would God send his only son to die an agonizing death to redeem an insignificant bit of carbon?"-Victor J. Stenger.

my point is to stop condemning all religious people as being wrong and you right. Its the exact same thing as christians painting all of themselves as deserving of heaven and you guys all deserve hell. You are condemning others and raising your self up. When you get right down to it, the only difference between everybody is their psychological, pathological, social and biological conditionings. If this is the only field of seperation - why dont you treat other christians with the same compassion you treat non-christians?

Ah but you see, we may claim them wrong, and us right. However, we are more than willing to accept that we are wrong IF proven wrong. Show us substantial, credible, empirical, rational evidence that we are wrong. And we will admit to it. We do not treat other christians differently other than how we talk to them when we are debating. It is not us that treat christians differently because of their beliefs, it is christians as well as others who treat us differently because of ours. How many Atheists are attacked for not believing in God. How many Atheists are attacked for simply voicing their opinions. How many Atheists are denied rights and discriminated against simply because of their thoughts and views and disbelief in god. Then turn around and ask yourself how many christians are attacked for their beliefs? How many christians are denied rights and discriminated against. [ By a majority btw. ]

"Why would God send his only son to die an agonizing death to redeem an insignificant bit of carbon?"-Victor J. Stenger.

If you look at something trying to prove your particular motive - you will make it prove your motive.

I agree. I wonder if when you are searching for your inner quiet if you are projecting your assumptions onto what you find? I wonder if your mind works the exact same way as you described? I'll bet it does.

What then, does that suggest about your claims here?

Quote:

You believe science is knowledge.

No one has made any such assertion.

Quote:

empty, with the eyes of a child

I understand this idea, I wanted very much to be a Buddhist (so I've done some study fuck you very much) but I could not get past the idea of reincarnation. And yes, you who are so clever, I know that there are different ways to look at reincarnation. It's just like every ancient philosopy, rewritten a thousand times.

Quote:

dismissing knowledge as relative truths, you are invited back into the kingdom of god, the garden of eden, nirvana.

And here we see where we break down.

Quote:

I assure you, you have not heard a thing I have said because you have not practiced the wisdom of nothingness

You know, for such an enlightened guy you sure to think a great deal of yourself. You've been nothing but backhanded insulting since you got your first response. I wonder why that is. What do you think? Oh great and wise dickhead?

Quote:

Become a bit more multi-cultural and embrace all walks of life, and then you can actually work on helping them get rid of their own dogma.

Why? I am not trying to be a prophet. I am not worried about getting into heaven or my spirit becoming eternal in some way. I'll leave that for you.

Quote:

Now, without coming to any conclusions about what, who, or how I am,

That's pretty interesting bright eyes. I wonder, with your deep knowledge of the human mind/spirit if you can recognize the assumptions you've made. Or, are you so advanced that you are above such things?

I think that since you've been such a jerk that you are not. You keep making these "I'm so superior to you it must hurt" remarks. Do you apply your own philosophy to your life? I doubt it, otherwise you'd start looking at the things you've said and realize what a second rate bullshit artist you are.

I am not sure which is worse. A Thiest or Athiest when they twist the Bible to prove themselves right.

They're both the same. Frankly the bible has enough in it to make any objective reader discard it without scraping the bottom of the barrel to glean dubious points.

Woah, woah, woah. Back up. These generalizations mean nothing.

Mjolnin and The Patrician, please show how those bible verses do not say what the FFRF says they say or make a case for hyperbole on the part of FFRF. If there's a problem with this brochure, I'd really like to know. And no, you can't use something from a different part of the bible that contradicts the verse in question. Everything must be in context, please...and by that I mean the context of what is happening during those verses.

Matt, please do a little research and make sure these verses say what FFRF says they do. Use your bullshit-o-meter to look for hyperbole, too. Again, if these verses don't say what the FFRF says they say, I'd like to know. I'm sure you would, too.

Respond to anything you find wrong (or right) with it with quotes, please. These broad, sweeping generalizations are turning this thread into a flamefest. Please try to address a few specific points.

Apologies Iruka. I took the bait and started flaming. That was my bad.

Anbesol wrote:

my point is to stop condemning all religious people as being wrong and you right.

Anbesol, with the information I have available I do consider all religious peoples wrong and myself correct. This is only true in the context of "does god exist" or "is Harry Potter real" (any fictional character will do). I make this assertion due to an utter lack of evidence. Through all of your philosophical tap-dancing you have thus far not given any evidence that your assumptions are correct. Merely that you have an assumption and you stand by it.

Also, I understand that my human mind can only interperet so much information and that there are aspects of the universe / reality that I probably don't understand or don't perceive. Granted, this is not reason to just start absently believing in god or Harry Potter, just a statement that it is very unlikely that I can ever know everything.

If you look at something trying to prove your particular motive - you will make it prove your motive.

I agree. I wonder if when you are searching for your inner quiet if you are projecting your assumptions onto what you find? I wonder if your mind works the exact same way as you described? I'll bet it does.

I have made no such assertions of superiority - I have only spoke of what is pertinent to the discussion, I said I believe in god and why, and I defended my conjecture. If you felt persecuted by my words, then there is an inner reason to your feeling that persecution. And you all have, several times, regarded science as knowledge - perhaps not in those words, but in your dogmatic implications.

Look, I came here because I see this community as the most sane, ration minded community and hope for the future of humanity and especially the western world. I came here out of deep respect for your motives and your drive - but I want to help you guys see the timber in your own eye. I have not singled anybody out, if you felt singled out, thats the persecution complex telling you something. I had made general statements that applied to whoever read them as such.

I also came here because Jesus spoke of some very divine truths, not ultimate, just empirically observed truths that were observed without the leaning of mind. You guys are teh closest community to understanding the brilliance of Jesus' parables, you are far closer to understanding them then the modern Christians are, but you are hurting your self by dismissing and negating all other forms of thought as inferior to yours. If you know the truth in Jesus' parables, and the metaphoric interpretations of the old testament, particularly Genesis, then when a christian tries to evangelize you - you will embrace them not as your enemy, but as your self, and express the compassion you wish to be shared unto you. You need not submit to their demands, only calmly refute them.

If you understand their bible better then they do, nothing can stop you now. But so long as you pick and prod about what theyre doing wrong, then you will only perpetuate these problems.

It is no secret globally that the western world, particularly america is the least intelligent, spirituall and socially developed country on the planet, the entire social system is crushing under the weight of its own capitalistic foundations. Its crushing under the weight of its own egocentricity, and concurrently its ethnocentricity. But you guys are taking an approach of "fight fire with fire" and, well, fire begets fire, we must fight fire with water if we wish to be effective.

Learn of Jesus' parables, see the wonderous truth in them, then see the sharp contrast of the current social conception of him, and see the sharp contrast in his teachings and in the religious practice. I promise you, I do not know what kind of persons you all are, I only know that you have a piece of you that is motivated to help counter the terroristic evangelist movement in this country - I have personally gone through a *lot* in the religious communities, not only in spiritual practice from all over the world, but in honest academic interest in all religions, including the abrahamic ones. I have been personally subject to the torturus behaviors of the evangelical community, and I am well aware of their misaction and misconduct and most of all their own short-sighted idiocy. I have already been married with a child and been seperated all thanks to the wonderful world of ideological dogmatic segregation - I now have an ex mother in law who wishes to zombify her 2 year old grandson with the deluded rantings and horrid ideas of heaven, hell, and the self serving behaviors of our modern church. I have made it my life dedication to battle this movement not for personal gain, but for societal gain - and this requires fighting fire with water. So, by demanding that the whole "does god exist" conception as the foundation of your seperation from other christians is superficial, and perpetuating the problem, fire is begetting fire. But, next time a christian condemns you to hell, realize that outward condemnation and inward condemnation are one in the same, as is revealed by their own Lord and Savior - Luke 6:37 Judge not, and ye shall not be judged. Condemn not, and ye shall not be condemnd. Forgive, and ye shall be forgiven.

take the dogma out of your site, and out of your movement, and your movement will grow. If you build it, they will come. But darkness can only beget darkness.

If you look at something trying to prove your particular motive - you will make it prove your motive.

I agree. I wonder if when you are searching for your inner quiet if you are projecting your assumptions onto what you find? I wonder if your mind works the exact same way as you described? I'll bet it does.

I'd bet $100 that you'd win that bet.

I'll bet you $100 that you have only proved it about your self by convicting your idea into me. I do not convict others by my own ideas, thats for the Christians. I have made simple empirical observations based on the words you spoke in the context of this discussion. I have not decided what kind of people you are, what kind of relationships you have, or what kind of intelligence you are outside of the very context of this discussion. I only wish to help you all, and again, as Jesus Says, you can only help those who will help themselves. You guys are really good, and I do respect you all, but I am just exploiting your own dogma, as to help remove the timber from your own eye, to see clearly enough to remove the sliver in theirs. I hope you guys know I do not mean any disrespect or condescent. I only wish to help improve the efficiency of your movement.

The best battle against Christianity - is understanding the person of christ. The modern Christians shit on his word, and if you can stand in the awareness of his words against the hypocrisy of his followers, they cannot stand against the weight of your conjectures.

Again, the "does god exist" inquiry is just about the most irrelavent and unimportant question to ask, its founded on preconceptions and superficiality behind semantics. Instead, ask about the contrast between the synoptic gospels, and the rest of the canonized new testament. Ask about the absurd notions of any specific texts in the book of revelations, and how the book is in direct competition with the teachings of christ. Ask about the gospel of Thomas and the other gnostic gospels, and the meanings behind refering christ as "the living christ", and why didnt they make it into the new testament, and why did the canon close, and why did the gospel of john feel it neccesary to take strong overtones and dismiss authenticity of the gnostic gospels by ridiculing the disciples who wrote them.

THOSE are questions to be asked, so long as you stick to your "does god exist" theory, you will get nowhere, and you will continute to fight fire with fire.

I just saw another post that said Im trying to convince people by having faith. PLEASE KNOW I SAID NO SUCH THING. I'm not asking you to believe anything that isnt self-evident and that you dont believe your self. Buddha says "Do not believe anyone, not even me, unless you your self intuitively agree". This is to lead ones spirit to the fruition of self-actualization, in which one can see the projections of others quite clearly in their expressions. This is observed realities - not leap of faith realities. Please - dont take anything anybody says on blind faith - but, seek to understand what they said, and why they said it.

I came here out of deep respect for your motives and your drive - but I want to help you guys see the timber in your own eye.

In my opinion, this pretty much sums it up: You want the RRS to change the way we do things and do it your way.

This, coming from a theist!

Anbesol, we have had people come onto this forum before who rant like this. We are who we are. Some of us are outspoken; some prefer a gentler approach.

Please do not come on these boards to complain about how things are done.

You are welcome to join the discussions and debates and offer your point of view on the topic at hand in that thread. You are welcome to share your opinions in an outspoken or gentle approach, whichever you prefer.

But do not come into these forums and complain about the group or how we do things.

I do not have any high truths I wish to impose upon you, I only wish to show you your own means of self-destruction. You have a goal, and you are hindering your selves from your goal. I play and see both sides of this argument - and I promise you, your behavior is giving fuel to their fire. I do not wish to tell you that you are wrong about anything, I only wish to show you that your behavior is battling your cause.

Listen to Hank Hanegraaf, or Lee Strobel, or many of the other countless evangelists. Theyre very intelligent and they have very good rebuttals to your behaviors and claims, so stop giving them behaviors, ideas, and claims for them to refute - instead, give them a pure refutation to their own imposing dogma. I really wish to help and I have no high truths to impose, please know this. But, I cannot help you if you refuse to help your selves. If I have been not gentle in my approach, then I'm sorry, I certainly strive to be kindly spoken, and the sharp words are simply to contrast sharp words misdirected towards me. If I have unneccesarily insulted anybody then I'm sorry, it was not intended...

And my friend, what makes you decide we are the means of our own undoing?

Quote:

Anbesol wrote:

I play and see both sides of this argument

And you think that Atheist's do not? I gurantee you that there are Atheist's on this forum that know the bible as well as other biblical and religious documents better than those of faith themselves.

Quote:

Anbesol wrote:

sten to Hank Hanegraaf, or Lee Strobel, or many of the other countless evangelists. Theyre very intelligent and they have very good rebuttals to your behaviors and claims, so stop giving them behaviors, ideas, and claims for them to refute - instead, give them a pure refutation to their own imposing dogma.

I appreciate your concern and your wanting to help. I really do. I'm sure we all do. But, whether you realize it or not, our beliefs contradict theirs. They believe they can never be wrong, they believe they have God behind them. They will always see us as wrong, they will always try to find a way to refute us, and they will always rely on blind faith or faith in general.

"Why would God send his only son to die an agonizing death to redeem an insignificant bit of carbon?"-Victor J. Stenger.